Today’s theme is going to address how reality and perceptions about men and women in society clash. However, instead of doing all the writing myself, I am going to use articles written by others to help address these distortions. These writers address the issues as well, if not better than I could, so I’ll share their articles with my readers.
Are Other Men Keeping Men Down?
In this article Dr. Helen addresses the way men in power actually use their power to discriminate against other men. Her article contains many elements that I feel are relevant to issues surrounding perceptions of men and masculinity. The most poignant is the belief that because men hold the most powerful positions in the world, men are living in a state of bliss because this aggregate wealth of power is shared. This is probably the most absurd myth generated by feminism.
The priority for the judgment of power should be less about who has it, and more about what those who have it actually do with it.
While men in this country hold most of the power, how many of these men can openly advocate for more resources and attention directed toward causes that are exclusive to males? And how many can openly advocate resources and attention to causes that are exclusive to females? It is easier to do the latter.
Any politician or corporate board member who openly advocates for male exclusive issues would immediately surround himself in damaging controversy – one he would never professionally recover from.
Quote from article: The mistake in that way of thinking is to look only at the top. If one were to look downward to the bottom of society instead, one finds mostly men there too. Who’s in prison, all over the world, as criminals or political prisoners? The population on Death Row has never approached 51% female. Who’s homeless? Again, mostly men. Whom does society use for bad or dangerous jobs? U.S. Department of Labor statistics report that 93% of the people killed on the job are men.
Why women don’t want top jobs, by a feminist
This article is probably one of the best I’ve read about gender issues in a long time. Author Rosie Boycott, a feminist, writes how she has started to discard many feminist thoughts and ideas because she has realized how unrealistic and damaging they are. All this after reading a new book by Susan Pinker called The Sexual Paradox. Pinker’s book presents evidence that males and females are genuinely different in spite of what feminist research has led us to believe, which leads Boycott to begin looking back at her own feminist beliefs, and start drawing different conclusions. Juxtaposing Pinker’s evidence, other research, and her own perceptions, Boycott begins to understand what I and others who once supported feminism have already figured out; the need for women’s equality is genuine, but feminists have made many too mistakes on the way to equality.
Her article is filled with many poignant insights, but here are two notable quotes:
Our values, Pinker asserts, are based on the simple fact that the world of men (i.e. success and drive) is the correct model.
I have always wondered why feminist disparage everything created under the umbrella of the patriarchy or masculinity, particularly its lust for power, control, money, sex, and status, only to find their advocacy desires these same components of life. It has always appeared to me that feminist conned us into believing that the behavior of the patriarchy was incorrigible, when in reality, feminists always seem more pissed off for being excluded from engaging in the same destructive behaviors as men, or just pissed off only because women are being judged more harshly when they do it. (See last article in this post)
To make men and women genuinely equal, we have to accept and honour difference, not mark everyone’s scorecard according to the same set of standards.
I find this hard to believe it came from a card-carrying feminist. When did logic trump feelings?
Anyway, good for her, and her willingness to change.
Sorry ladies, the male birth control pill is not about you
Excellent article concerning the controversies surrounding the development of a male birth control pill. The author, George Dvorsky, explains why the male contraceptive will actually liberate males the same way female contraceptives did for women.
Dvorsky cautions that while women have been looking at the male pill as another step towards equality, the reality is, it will begin to address the inequalities males endure concerning reproductive rights – an inequality females refuse to address.
Quote from article: According to the 2004 National Scruples and Lies Survey (which polled 5,000 women in the United Kingdom), 42% of women claimed they would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, regardless of the wishes of their partners.
Despite DNA, Dad’s Paternity Denied
Here is another story that makes me question all those in society that vocalize how important fathers are to their children. I am not talking about father rights activists or men’s rights activists; I know their commitment is genuine. I’m addressing those who talk so feverishly about the importance of a man’s role in raising his children until, of course, a crisis develops. These people consist of men and women, feminist and liberals, Christians and conservatives, and most importantly, politicians, lawyers, and judges.
Hope I didn’t miss anybody.
And that’s my point. Our society is hell bent on making men take responsibility for their children, that is of course until a situation arises where a man is actually trying to take responsibility for his children, and in return it may lead to the mother having to sacrifice some of her rights. This is when we find out emphasizing the importance of fathers and fatherhood is nothing more than an insidious conceptual tool used to manipulate men into believing they are of equal parent status, and will receive the same treatment as mothers for similar responsibilities.
In this story, a man named James Rhoades had an affair with a married woman that resulted in the birth of a child. Stupid on both their parts, but it gets crazier.
Instead of running from his parental responsibilities, which would have been the easiest thing to do, he chose to venture into the unknown, an uncomfortable situation of fighting for the right to be the father of his child under these unusual circumstances.
He lost.
The Kentucky Supreme Court ruled that Rhoades could not move forward with a paternity case to prove he is the biological father. The court ruled that the sanctity of the women’s marriage and the undisturbed well-being of the child is of greater priority than Rhoades inherent biological right. He is denied any part in his child’s life until he/she reaches adulthood and decides on his or her own to have contact with him.
After reading numerous stories like this over the years, I’ve come to really appreciate the saying, “Actions speak louder than words.”
I only trust those people of action concerning fatherhood, not words. The “wordy” people are pious “do-gooders” looking to shape an egocentric image of themselves rather than a sincere image of fatherhood.
I pay a man for regular sex
This article is anonymously written, and from what I read, it was the only thought that showed an ounce of intellect.
The female writer shares her story with readers concerning her arrangement for sex – she pays for it.
After being divorced, and feeling the need for an active sex life, she decided to pay a man at least once of month for sex.
What I love about this article is the many excuses she uses to justify her behavior – just like women’s stereotypical assessment of men. As a matter of fact, she shows an interesting trait that most women have over men – they are much better liars. Not only does she concoct a ritual used to shield and deceive her family and friends from her behavior, but it is apparent her ego has convinced herself that this arrangement benefits everybody – the “benevolent factor”.
The benevolent factor is a term I use to describe women who, when caught engaging in the same behavior as men, twist the consequences of their behavior to appear as if it actually is a greater benefit for everyone involved. As an example she says,
“I don’t want all the complications involved in getting into a relationship – I want to be able to concentrate on my children, my job and my life without introducing a man who might well walk out at some point, thus upsetting the children.”
She uses the emotional needs of her children to justify her behavior. And at the same time, she blames men and their irresponsible behavior for her irresponsible behavior. She believes,
Her behavior can be seen as a cry of desperation towards the recognition that men need to change their behavior. If they would just change, then those like her will change; therefore, everyone will benefit!
I think this is where Tiny Tim exclaims, “And God Bless everyone!”
It’s prostitution – that’s it!
As I wrote earlier, it appears women have never been actually upset or appalled at some of men’s behavior as they claim. As women become more empowered, their own questionable behavior creates the appearance that in the end, inequality has only denied them the opportunity to do the same.
This is why I am proud to be a man and masculine. It seems to me, contrary to popular belief, when women are put in the same situations as men, they are not any better than men.
It’s just another distortion of the truth.
Contact:
I wholeheartedly agree with the spirit of this article. I am (formerly) an Active Duty soldier who left the army in order to be a better father to my soon to be newborn son,as no one who is a soldier during wartime is allowed paternal leave. Also because the young woman that I married seemed like an incapable and dangerous person to leave an infant with. I never trusted that further deployments in Iraq that were part of the then current Army doctrine were in the best interests of the country that I had sworn to defend. The US is still no safer from terrorists due to the bungling of the war, which still continues to occur despite a new Commander in Chief. All this aside I served to the best of my ability for as long as my heart could bear it, and was honorably discharged on June 9th, 2005.
Kassandra and I had known each other for a month before we married,and have long since divorced in 2007 . I never planned to have a child with her, and the exact date and natural parentage by myself was never fully allowed to be proven one way or another. Less than a month after my return to civilian life, my son was born…. at this time we were both unemployed and I was looking for work when certain parties decided to report this to DHS. I live in the state of Iowa, and any person who has no money for any kind of legal defense in cases like mine is treated as a criminal without recourse. I continued to see my son, as did Kassandra thru supervised visits. While in foster care Kamden developed issues with his resperation, due mostly to the fact that the first temporary foster parents who had been assigned to caring for him during part of the litigation process were nicotine addicts at the very least.
This was held against my case for paternity due to my lack of medical insurance outside of what the Army had previously provided.
I never hurt my son in any way and the only charge that was brought against me were allegations of neglect that were never fully proven, nor was I able to properly defend myself from. There is no legal allowance for visitations or allowances for either blood parent to ever see their children after custody has been terminated.(I nor my wife no longer have any parental rights at this time.)
I would have found a way to provide for my son, but in the process of custody hearings that tore my family’s future in three different directions. Finding an income that would allow me to afford adequate legal defense outside of the public defender appointed to me by the same organization that I was fighting, was nigh impossible. The state leaned to Kassandra to be the primary caregiver, until she failed a routine drug test in the spring of 2006. She signed her rights away shortly after this. I had no paternity DNA test result that linked Kamden to me as a father. The State terminated my rights on its own feeble excuses in 2007.
The court’s main precedence for their decisions to attempt to award rights to Kassandra were solely based on the fact that I was never allowed to legally determine my paternity, despite the fact that I was at the hospital when he was born, and paid child support for him until i had no right to do so… I miss him constantly. Sometimes when I see a child that reminds me of him.. my heart aches knowing that i may never see him again. I have returned to college to expand my job skills, and I have so far have been maintaining a 3.8 GPA. I am majoring in photography and one day I hope that my son and I will be reunited despite the crooked path that has brought me to where i am today. My only hope and comfort is that the mother that cares for him now is morally just and would never do drugs, run around like a cat in heat, or sell out a child’s father for a bi-weekly paycheck. I loved Kamden, and I keep my pictures of him close to me at all times. I had just as much right to be a parent as my wife did, and all the folks who were supposed to be “helping me” were doing is trying to get their quota of involvements in state-sponsored adoptions. When I graduate and pay off my student loans I intend to leave Iowa and begin legal action to regain custody thru the laws of another state. I hope that this will all be possible within the near future.
I feel empty at the thought of not knowing where he is or if he is alive and well. It is September 14, 2009. I pray that I have nothing to fear for, and that this will all work out for the best someday….
signed,
A victim of women’s “rights”
Comment by Thomas Rush — October 14, 2009 @ 4:39 pm |